135391-feeling-really-good-about-that-signature-status-right-now
Content ---- ---- ---- ---- You mean the one they removed? http://www.wildstar-online.com/en/news/2015-10-01-new-wildstar-servers-incoming/ | |} ---- ---- Truthfully you don't come across as someone worth having around, but a customer is a customer and they need 'em. Let them focus on the problems, then let them address compensation. Disgust and demands are the domain of children. | |} ---- Nothing close to a AAA expansion, I'm afraid.You're overblowing what in reality is minor changes to make the game easier for new players to understand and a cash shop. | |} ---- 5 hours.. so, yeah, priority is working as intended. | |} ---- Those are small changes? Re-doing entire systems isn't small, I'm afraid. | |} ---- You keep saying that. Let's just agree to disagree, because one of us is right and we're both convinced who that is. Difference being one of us is basing it on informed observation. | |} ---- You're confusing client features with server load. | |} ---- Bottom line is that it doesn't matter. The game wasn't ready, the servers weren't ready, the various support teams weren't ready. | |} ---- Feel free to post your IT degree, your credentials in coding, and show me exactly how you would rework code in the middle of a pre made system without blowing out something somewhere else. No? The reason all WoW expansions have issues is because the guys who coded vanilla now work on GW2, and the new guys have no idea how to integrate their structure into the old stuff, even if they did, it would cause massive issues, how big the changes were is completely irrelevant, they are changes. | |} ---- Bottom line is; it does. Mutating your own argument to win your own argument isn't going to win your argument. The game isn't the server, the game is just fine, massively improved and ready to welcome new players with open arms. The issues are load based on nothing more. And here's the clue; the load is you, and I, and everyone else, and here we all are on launch clambering to get in... just like, say, an MMO launch. Or a massive expansion. Edited October 2, 2015 by Amayasu | |} ---- If the framework was written in a logical and modern design pattern with a proper separation of concerns while implementing proper unit testing, the concept of adding to, removing from, or modifying existing code in place is actually a fairly elementary task for any seasoned software engineer. Now assuming all of the above criteria has been met, finishing the development cycle with a proper external testing cycle still would not have alleviated the bottle neck issue due to simple human nature - "I'm not testing or logging in until launch". Because of that mentality the servers were never properly load balanced, and the queuing pipeline never properly implemented. ( This can be easily tested, purchase one account and log in, on another test rig, log in a free account, you'll notice that the login queue estimate is completely arbitrary. ) Their current solution of adding servers and merging once the initial free player burn off is the only option at this moment. The failure of this launch is not the addition or modification of features, it's the pipeline. Pure and simple. As for my qualifications, I am a Senior Software engineer of 30 years experience in languages ranging from C to C# in development environments ranging from Banks to Gaming. Edited October 2, 2015 by Captain Howdy | |} ---- Just logged onto Entity with no queue as a returning F2P so maybe its not working as intended. | |} ---- I'm sitting at 1058 as a subscriber. Also, I hate your face. | |} ---- ---- Actually that was someone else's argument. My argument was that they weren't ready and they've failed to fix it. I don't see that I've strayed from my argument at all. I know what server load is. I've done online game development. Personally, if I were planning a conversion like this (it's not a launch... stop that), I'd have wanted extensive stress testing of my existing infrastructure because I know that people have been making a big deal about Wildstar going free to play and I'd want to make sure my servers weren't going to burst into flames as soon as we pushed the button... which is exactly what happened. They did some closed testing of their redesign. They ignored the servers. Shop works great. Servers burst into flames. Test failure. | |} ---- Well they plan to re merge them once population falls. Honestly, I think it's the best, and only option. | |} ---- ---- ---- Might. We'll find out tomorrow. | |} ---- Congratulations, that would be a perfect answer, if the first line wasn't an assumption. And neglecting the fact that the game had removals and alot added does not help in the slightest, fact is (if you are what you say you are) then you would know changing something at any point in existing framework has a domino effect that may or may not cause issues down the line. Adding to the end is nowhere near as difficult in this day and age, but the middle? yeah no there are going to be problems, end of story. | |} ---- Going by your response, you are not a very future thinking engineer. | |} ---- We used to say this all the time. what was important to me is, i saw improvements | |} ---- Most of the time when I get a queue message, I quit and relog and get in right away (I just did it now, in fact - got a 2 hour queue message, relogged and I'm in the game). I don't know why that happens. I'm a subscriber as well, though, so maybe there's a bug that initially puts subscribers in a queue or something. | |} ---- Gunna have to give it a try next time ( I'm down to 14 minutes so I'm scared to try it now lol ). | |} ---- Did you read that some place? Edited October 2, 2015 by Summanus | |} ---- ---- Finally, someone who knows what they're talking about. I feel like I'll be quoting this in the future. | |} ---- So knowing that there were server issues you subscribed? And now you want a week free? Wake up... | |} ---- Can you then explain why it was called "stress testing" in the beta, if it was not testing the server load? | |} ---- I don't think it's quite possible to fully prepare for a launch. Even in the event that there is a solid testing period it isn't likely to give the same numbers that servers will be hit with at launch, which will cause problems. If you are unprepared for what happens (which ideally happens dude to issues cropping up from player volume rather than bugs missed in testing/development) you can find the problems and adjust as necessary until the player base levels out and things in general stabilize. If you somehow manage to overprepare and only encounter issues relevant to the game itself that weren't caught in testing (an event which I don't think has happened for any launch of a game or expansion) then you're going to wind up with an excess of materials and hardware while your player base will still dwindle and level off...but getting rid of the excess could trigger a domino effect of players leaving because they see the game is reducing which damages the player base numbers and etc. I'm no software engineer or game developer...but I've been through a number of MMO launches and expansions and the same things happen every damn time. Problems crop up, the people behind the game work furiously to fix them, players march onto the forums and rant and rave like entitled children, and then things eventually get fixed and I stop bothering with the forums until the next launch because quite frankly it's darkly hilarious how upset and entitled people get during launches. As a note: I am not proclaiming that anyone in particular is acting like an entitled child here, but a lot of people seem to get the idea that "I paid X for Y service" and the fact that it isn't immediately handed to them is an indicator of foul play or incompetence. | |} ---- ---- Stress testing requires that all parties are involved, include those that as I stated wouldn't test until launch. At my last game launch ( given this was almost 10 years ago ) we had a open stress test... that test included around 2,000 concurrent connections. When we launched, it was closer to 11,000. We had planned for 7,000. Do you see the problem? | |} ----